Case Note & Summary
The writ petition challenged an order passed by the XXIV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, directing the transfer of the petitioner, an undertrial prisoner accused in Crime No. 250 of 2024 for offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, from Bangalore Central Prison to Belagavi Central Prison. The background involved a high-profile murder case where accused No. 2, a film actor named Darshan, was photographed inside Parappana Agrahara Central Jail with a convict, Wilsongarden Naga, consuming tea and holding a cigarette. The prison authorities expressed concerns that such images would demoralize witnesses and create a public perception of differential treatment, prompting a requisition before the Magistrate to transfer all accused to different prisons across Karnataka. The petitioner, arraigned as accused No. 14 and arrested on 10 June 2024, was not present in the photograph or otherwise connected to the incident. Nevertheless, on 27 August 2024, the Magistrate passed a blanket order transferring him along with other accused, including to Belagavi. The petitioner approached the High Court on 29 August 2024, and while a coordinate bench initially granted a stay of the transfer if the petitioner had not already been shifted, he was already in transit and was consequently lodged in Belagavi. The petitioner contended that the transfer caused severe hardship, including allegations of being kept in an ‘Andheri Cell’ (dark cell) for 15 hours daily and forced to sit before a camera for 8 hours under the guise of observation. The State, refuting these allegations through an affidavit filed by jail authorities, justified the transfer as necessary to ensure equal treatment of all accused and to prevent witness demoralization. The court, after examining the material, found that the Magistrate’s order lacked application of mind as it failed to consider the individual role of the petitioner, who was neither involved in nor responsible for the photograph that triggered the transfer. The court held that an order transferring an undertrial prisoner must be based on an assessment of individual circumstances; a blanket transfer without such analysis is arbitrary and vitiated by non‑application of mind. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, the impugned order dated 27 August 2024 was quashed, and the petitioner was directed to be transferred back to Bangalore Central Prison forthwith.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Transfer of Undertrial Prisoners - Non-application of Mind - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302, 201 - Magistrate's Order - The petitioner, accused No.14, was transferred along with other accused after an incident where accused No.2 was photographed with a convict within the prison; the petitioner had no involvement in the said incident. The Magistrate passed a blanket order without assessing the individual role of the petitioner. Held that the order suffers from non-application of mind and is arbitrary; the writ petition allowed and the petitioner directed to be transferred back to Bangalore Central Prison (Para 9 and Order).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of the XXIV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate directing transfer of the petitioner from Bangalore Central Prison to Belagavi Prison, without considering his individual role in the incident, suffers from non-application of mind and is arbitrary.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 27-08-2024 passed by the XXIV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, directing transfer of the petitioner to Belagavi, is quashed. The petitioner shall be transferred back to Bangalore Central Prison forthwith. Observations made in the course of the order shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings.
Law Points
- Transfer of undertrial prisoner must be based on individual circumstances and not on blanket grounds
- Magistrate's order transferring prisoner without application of mind is arbitrary and vitiated
- Non-application of mind in judicial orders violates procedural fairness
- Undertrial prisoners have a right against arbitrary transfer under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution
